Comment by tptacek | Hacker News Reader

Comment by tptacek | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This is a terrible term but I'll use it because it works here: the genre of burger we are talking about here is "cheap burger" (I mean that as a quality/experience descriptor, not price). It's a relatively thin, wide ground chuck patty on a good-but-standard bun; the only "interesting" ingredient they use is hamburger relish.

So, yeah I am explicitly saying that the price ceiling and the demand for the burger aren't as neatly related as it looks, because the substitutes for this particular burger are going to be very close to it in quality (it's possible that for something close to 50% of patrons, this burger will be perceived as "worse" than other cheap burgers they've had, because opinions vary).

If this was that Raoul's burger, where it's ground short rib and brisket with a triple cream brie and a cognac cream dipping sauce, I'd be right there with you. But Stanich is apparently just a cheap diner burger very well executed (in Alexander's estimation, but I have no reason to doubt him). If you charge $30 for that, people will pay (once), and then feel ripped off. For a little while. Then word will get out.

It probably is the best cheap diner burger in America! The dude did the research! I'm just saying, you probably can't charge $30 for a cheap burger, sustainably. You'll do OK in the short term, and then irreversibly harm the business.

Scaling out makes a lot more sense. He probably should franchise.

Again, you're just comparing burgers in isolation, but that's not how it works. This isn't delivery. People pay extra for ambiance, for service, for exclusivity, for visuals, etc. The fact that people are standing in line for 5 hours means that they don't view it as just another cheap burger. They're willing to pay more. I'm half convinced that people in NYC will pay more BECAUSE they stood in line. How else would you know if it's good if there's not a bunch of New Yorkers validating your choices by waiting in the freezing cold too?? :)

And you don't need to charge $30. Charging a few extra bucks probably solves this problem without the downsides you're talking about.

Finally, I'm also not convinced those problems you suggest would be caused by charging $30 are actually problems. Maybe people feel like it wasn't worth it, but so what? Word gets out that the $30 burgers are overpriced...does that mean people will stop coming? There's an entire class of overpriced crappy restaurants that stay busy because of former glory, or location, or whatever. Like almost every big restaurant in a tourist zone of major world cities.

And if they DO stop coming, then doesn't that solve the original problem? Crowds dry up, you drop the prices back down, life goes on.

Just seems like almost anything would be better than throwing your hands up and shutting down the restaurant. Which ironically isn't even what happened here!

The subtext of my argument is that they are standing in line not knowing what they're going to get, expecting (or at least hoping for) a revelation that is not going to come. I agree with Alexander that these burgers are the best burgers (I haven't had this one but am familiar with the genre! The best Chicago burgers from the same genre!), but I think Alexander has, ironically, a more sophisticated take on these things than his readers do.

Remember, the 2nd place burger on his list is an absurd chef burger, even by the standards of chef burgers.

My favorite Chicago food writer has a bit about NYC pizza (he's a former NY-er) that I think captures the spirit of where I'm coming from, which is that the food tourists that seek out the best NYC slice have missed the point entirely, and that the best NYC slice is always within 1-2 blocks of where you're standing.

There's a distinction between being "great" and being "destination food" that this whole article is lamenting people --- I'd include this thread among those people --- not understanding. It's funny to see that misunderstanding expressed on HN in the language of HN --- product pricing and product/market fit.

You have to acknowledge the point he is making, he said you don't have to get to $30 to find the right spot, moreover making it a franchise will definitely take away the lore of the place and quality control. Better to raise the price but have a reward system that keeps the price lower for those who have supported the restaurant for years.

> He probably should franchise.

That assumes that whatever it is that he was doing before things blew up can be scaled. I think it's quite possible that it can't. Particularly as, according to Alexander, the things that pushed the place over the top were intangibles about atmosphere, which isn't reproducible.

Also, "scaling" assumes that the owner wants to scale. If he's only interested in operating a neighborhood burger diner, he probably doesn't.

The article talks about him actively considering franchising. And: I doubt there's really anything to the burger here that can't be replicated. Further: he doesn't have to replicate it perfectly, just enough to serve the local customers he wants to serve while the foodies queue up at the original shop.

> If you charge $30 for that, people will pay (once), and then feel ripped off. For a little while. Then word will get out.

This sounds like exactly what Stanich would have wanted.

> If you charge $30 for that, people will pay (once), and then feel ripped off.

Waiting 5h has EXACTLY the same effect. The difference is that in one situation, he will make 10x more profit out of it and will be able to ride the hard months later on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com